Episode 133: Michael Nesbitt on How the Senate Pushed Back Against a Government Bill on Searching Digital Devices at the Border

July 04, 2022 00:33:35
Episode 133: Michael Nesbitt on How the Senate Pushed Back Against a Government Bill on Searching Digital Devices at the Border
Law Bytes
Episode 133: Michael Nesbitt on How the Senate Pushed Back Against a Government Bill on Searching Digital Devices at the Border
/

Show Notes

It isn’t every day that a Senate committee examines legislation and makes notable changes against the wishes of the government. But that’s what happened last month as a Senate committee reviewed Bill S-7, which raised significant privacy concerns regarding the legal standard for searches of digital devices at the border. University of Calgary law professor Michael Nesbitt, who teaches and researches in the areas of criminal and national security law, appeared before the committee to argue against the government’s proposed approach. He joins the Law Bytes podcast to talk about the bill, the change at the Senate, and what lies ahead as the bill moves to the House of Commons in the fall.

Other Episodes

Episode

October 20, 2021 00:02:24
Episode Cover

Episode 1: Welcome to LawBytes

In recent years the intersection between law, technology, and policy has exploded as digital policy has become a mainstream concern in Canada and around the world. I am very excited to announce the launch of LawBytes: A Podcast with Michael Geist. This podcast will explore digital policies in conversations with people studying the legal and policy challenges, setting the rules, or who are experts in the field. It will provide a Canadian perspective, but since the internet is global, examining international developments and Canada’s role in shaping global digital policy is be an important part of the story. The preview episode is available now and first full episode – a conversation with UK Information Commissioner Elizabeth Denham – will be available next week. All episodes will be available under a Creative Commons licence. You can subscribe at Apple Podcasts, Google Play, or Spotify as well as follow on Twitter at @LawBytesPod. ...

Listen

Episode

October 28, 2021 00:31:00
Episode Cover

Episode 41: Nasma Ahmed With a Call for a Ban on Facial Recognition Technologies

Facial recognition technologies have attracted mounting attention in recent weeks led by a New York Times report on Clearview AI, soon followed by revelations of police use of the service in multiple Canadian cities. In fact, just after recording the interview for this podcast, there were revelations that the Clearview AI service has been used in Canada by an even wider array of police forces, retailers, insurance investigators, and others than previously imagined. In some instances, those organizations had denied using the service. There are now several privacy commissioner investigations into the situation. To examine the concerns associated with facial recognition technologies and what we should do about it, I’m joined on the podcast this week by Nasma Ahmed, a technologist and community organizer that works within the intersections of social justice, technology and policy. She recently published an op-ed in the Globe and Mail with McGill’s Taylor Owen calling for a pause on the technology. Nasma is currently Director of the Digital Justice Lab, which is based in Toronto. The podcast can be downloaded here and is embedded below. Subscribe to the podcast via Apple Podcast, Google Play, Spotify or the RSS feed. Updates on the podcast on Twitter at @Lawbytespod. Show Notes: Taylor Owen and Nasma Ahmed, Let’s Face the Facts: To Ensure Our Digital Rights, We Must Hit Pause on Facial-Recognition Technology Credits: Global News, Controversial Facial Recognition Tool Admittedly Used by Toronto Police CBC News, Why Experts Are Concerned About Facial-Recognition Technology ...

Listen

Episode

June 20, 2022 00:26:25
Episode Cover

Episode 131: The Bill C-11 Clause-by-Clause Review - What “An Affront to Democracy” Sounds Like

Last week, the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage rushed through the clause-by-clause review of Bill C-11 in a manner that should not be forgotten or normalized. Despite the absence of any actual deadline, the government insisted that just three two hour sessions be allocated to full clause-by-clause review of the bill. Once the government-imposed deadline arrived at 9:00 pm, the committee moved to voting on the remaining proposed amendments without any debate, discussion, questions for department officials, or public disclosure of what was being voted on. This week’s Law Bytes podcast features clips from a hearing that one Member of Parliament described as “an affront to democracy”. ...

Listen